JKR calls Labour's Bluff - Offering Meeting leadership only on her terms

[fromorbit]

JKR is playing at a different level. After Starmer and Reeves offered to meet with her she gave them her conditions.

I'll be happy to meet after NoXYinXXprisons, Lesbian Labour, Womens Rights Network, WomansPlaceUK and Alliance LGB have been given in person meetings with the Labour leadership. I'd also like to know whether Angela Rayner still considers the last two organisations hate groups.

They are trapped either they now have to meet with gay and women's groups and listen to them something they are desperate not to do. It is not impossible then that Reeves at least can be made to see some sense. Even talking with these groups and JKR will also make TRAs go ballistic and many will leave the party. Chances are that Labour will promise a bunch of stuff to JKR which If Labour still follow gender nonsense after that they can be fully held to account for. If they promise single sex spaces are safe then every time that is breached Labour's credibility will be on the line

Or if they refuse to meet with the groups they prove EVERYTHING JKR said in her essay was right.

The media are now hyping the meeting further locking Labour in

BRING IT ON
Keir Starmer insists he WILL meet with JK Rowling to thrash out trans and gender rights & ‘respects’ her views
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/28714134/keir-starmer-jk-rowling-trans/

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/24/labour-gender-transition-recognition-process-trans.

The majority of the journalists are from the same establishment left-leaning circles as the politicians, so most journalists are as far behind and under informed on this issue as the people they’re attempting to question. It’s ridiculous how none of them ever put any proper research into the issues involved 🤬

Starmer twaddling (thank you Jane) away on radio today: paraphrased:

"I listen and totally understand and value women's need for biological sex spaces, will protect them, and will make it so that poor sad vulnerable men with gender identities get to use them too."

Where the actual fuck do you plan for the women to go who are pushed out of those spaces so those men can express their true inner selves you absolute muppet?

And not only that, these men, and Starmer, require the presence of women in those spaces in order to provide the validation.

Important point.

I know you're commenting on my own post, but it really is important.

The conversation always swings back to 'vulnerable, traumatised men'.

It needs to focus on the women.

And not just what they need or want. Because you then get the old clash of rights conversation. However spurious.

What can never be an attributed to a clash of rights, is the fact that women are being used to validate men. Their very presence is the attraction.

Without them, it's just a space. These men don't want a space. They want a space with women in it.

How can you be protecting women's rights as they stand, if you won't agree to define what a woman? Or just leave it as an area of law which is causing problems for women?

Such a depressing debate with KS. Any decent man who respects women would understand why biological women need single sex spaces to preserve their privacy, safety and dignity and they would be uncomfortable going into a single sex women’s space. My adult ds wouldn’t even go into a Victoria Secrets shop to buy his gf a present that she asked for because it was so intensely female that he felt he shouldn’t be there fgs

Or believe that women should be a resource for the use of men, and not have the option of consent? Because men have Needs?

I'm not kidding when I say start watching the marital rape clause.

Listening now. Great stuff, Jane! If only the likes of Newsnight would put him on the spot like that! 👏👏

Jane, just listened, you were fab. Thanks! Love it! 👏🍾

Whilst looking on t'internet for Our Jane, I came across this. Apologies for posting something from Pink News (not my usual paper!) but it is worth a read:

Keir Starmer continues U-turn on trans rights, backs Rosie Duffield (thepinknews.com)

Today’s been quite a contrast! Keir Starmer showing just how out of touch he is via his bruising encounter with the mighty Jane. And Rishi Sunak showing a very human, emotional side in quite a moving statement about the affect of racism on him and his family.

Who would have predicted that on a rainy Wednesday in May?

The lack of anything from Mrs Starmer ever is very telling. First the anti-semitism in the Labour Party which KS accepted and went along with then this prioritising of trans woMEN over biological women by KS as demonstrated in his encounter with Jane today. I do wonder whether Victoria Starmer is one of these trad wives who goes along with everything her dh decides if so is this the kind of man we want as PM who see women as a compliant companion who toes the line?

I don't think we should be expecting any public comments from Mrs Starmer nor infer any meaning from this?

Mrs Starmer has every right to her privacy.

She's married to Sir Keir. I think she's been punished enough already.

I think she's been punished enough already.

Although as has been said on other threads to be the source of why eradicating anti-semitism in the Labour Party turned it into making it about Zionism, and ditto trans.

(Sorry to link to another thread, but sometimes wonder with men like David Tenant and KS that not having quite grasped issues, or points of views, from loved ones, they then go over the top in trying to present just how on message they are.)

Angela Rayner seems spooked. She trips over her words, can’t even call the EA by its correct name and quite frankly could be a Championship Dodgeball player based on her attempts at dodging the actual question 🙄

https://x.com/channel4news/status/1806730163649986823?s=46&t=vZsKCHJJ4lL6NrAoNyJFww

You would hope a dw would have some influence over her dh and they would discuss pertinent issues of the day and come to some common agreement . I can’t quite believe she as a Jewish woman has watched as British Jews and biological women in the Labour Party being abused, attacked and cancelled under his stewardship. I personally would not have being able to have stayed with him.

Exactly. If my DH was into gender woo, he'd have been gone!

I think the question we should be asking is "what is the purpose of a GRC?" and "What rights does a GRC confer?"

This is the question to Starmer

Where does a man with a GRC get access?

Exactly.

It's really quite simple. What rights does it confer?

And what is the criteria for getting one?

Because, as it's all based on self reporting, paedophiles, rapists, murderers, the lot can all apply.

There's no barrier.

The question of "Do you believe that humans can change sex?" also needs to be asked.

If he says no (because, duh!) then he admits that transwomen do not belong in women's single sex spaces.

If he says yes then we know a) he has no issue with transwomen in female only spaces and b) he needs a sit down with Prof/Lord Robert Winston.

I do wonder whether Victoria Starmer is one of these trad wives who goes along with everything her dh decides if so is this the kind of man we want as PM who see women as a compliant companion who toes the line?

I wondered the opposite actually. KS is such a wet blanket, and has often praised his wife’s “sassiness”, perhaps he’s taking his lead on this from her?